After a long dispute, the EU Parliament has voted in an expedited procedure to extend the controversial exception rule for the indiscriminate scanning of chats.
On the last day of session before the parliamentary summer break, the EU Parliament narrowly voted to extend the long-controversial legal basis for Chat Control 1.0 for another approximately two years. Amendments that would have completely rejected an initiative by the Council of Ministers did not find the required absolute majority at the very beginning of the vote. Later, only two correction proposals managed to overcome this hurdle, stipulating that the scanning of private chat messages should not occur with end-to-end encryption.
The plan is exclusively for “special technology for the sole purpose of detecting and removing known online material of child sexual abuse.” Photos or videos not previously captured would therefore not be searched for. Ultimately, 276 representatives voted against the member states’ motion to reactivate Chat Control, 286 voted in favor, and 30 abstained.
The result paves the way to quickly reinstate a transitional regulation that expired in April. This exception regulation allows tech giants like Meta, Google, or Microsoft to voluntarily search private chats, emails, and messenger services for material related to child sexual abuse without specific suspicion.
The development had already become apparent on Tuesday. With a narrow majority of 331 to 304 votes with eleven abstentions, MEPs voted for an urgency motion that enabled Thursday’s vote. Tug-of-war in the background
Behind the scenes of the decision was an unprecedented political tug-of-war that has caused consternation among civil rights advocates and opposition politicians alike. As recently as March, MEPs had, after tough negotiations in the Council of the EU, let an extension of the interim regulation fail, thus sealing the temporary end of Chat Control 1.0. That the same text was quickly brought back onto the agenda just before the summer break is thanks to a strategic maneuver by the Christian Democratic EPP group around President Roberta Metsola, supported by the Council and the EU Commission.
Critics speak of a democratic foul play. Although the majority of MEPs actually present in the chamber voted against the proposal, it passed. Fierce resistance against the procedure also emerged within the liberal Renew group until the very end. MEP Irena Joveva emphasized that the House cannot simply wave through mass surveillance of the population. It is about protecting both children and citizens’ privacy. Rapporteur Birgit Sippel (SPD) also condemned the short-notice expedited procedure without the involvement of the responsible committee, calling it unfair maneuvering.
The vote has direct consequences for the approximately 450 million EU citizens. According to critics, large US tech corporations, which lobbied heavily for the exception rule in the run-up, are now once again receiving a legal free pass to automatically scan private digital mailboxes billions of times. While the amendment successfully introduced by the Greens ensures that fully encrypted communication should formally remain protected, it does little to change the fundamental problem of the dossier. No acute protection gap
An evaluation report by the EU Commission gives the previous practice of Chat Control a very poor assessment. The Brussels government institution itself admits that after years of application, no proof of the proportionality of the measures can be provided. Only a tiny fraction of the messages scanned worldwide – just 0.00000077 percent in the EU – actually contained illegal material.
On the other hand, there is immense susceptibility to errors: the false positive rates of the filter technologies used are up to 20 percent, leading to mass suspicion of serious crimes for innocent citizens. The Commission could not demonstrate a clear link between automated reports and real convictions or the rescue of abused children. For civil rights advocate Patrick Breyer, it is clear: “Suspicionless chat control is as unacceptable as randomly opening all letters.”
The role of the German government also raises questions. While it was always stated in Berlin that suspicionless chat controls are an absolute taboo in a state governed by the rule of law, the coalition buckled in the Brussels bodies and paved the way for the current expedited procedure. The argument often made by proponents that the expiry of the regulation in April would have led to an acute legal gap is refuted by new figures: the Federal Criminal Police Office did not record any drop in suspicious activity reports after its expiry in spring. “Black day for civil rights”
The reactivation of Chat Control 1.0 also casts a shadow over the parallel negotiations on Chat Control 2.0. This is intended to create a permanent and mandatory legal basis for all providers. EU MEP Erik Marquardt (Greens) speaks of a black day for civil rights: the political horse-trading is blocking targeted, effective measures such as an EU child protection center and the strengthening of law enforcement agencies. Green Party MP Jeanne Dillschneider also demands: “We finally need effective child protection in the digital space. This important concern must not be played off against the fundamental rights of all.”
The temporary exception provision now restricts the confidentiality of digital communication for another 24 months. It overrides core areas of the European e-Privacy Directive.